Abstract 91 – Bear Management-Related Terms for Standardized Use

Carl Lackey, Dave Telesco, Hillary Cooley, Kim Annis, Dave Battle, Paul Frame,
Lindsey Mangipane, Colleen Olfenbuttel, Mark Vieira, Tammy Waldrop

The ability of North American wildlife agencies to accurately define and share information
about human-wildlife conflict is important for agency conservation efforts, interagency
communications, and public education. To manage human-bear conflict, it is essential that
interagency communication and public messaging be effective and consistent. Yet, defining
human-bear conflicts can be difficult and application is inconsistent. Further, some commonly
used terms used in agency messaging and often repeated by the public are subjective and can
have negative connotations for bears. The International Association for Bear Research and
Management’s (IBA) Management Committee, with members representing nine jurisdictions in
North America, conducted a literature search of terms and definitions used in bear
management and bear research to: (1) identify terms and definitions that were clear, concise,
and used consistently among jurisdictions; (2) identify terms that were inconsistently used and
defined; and (3) identify terms that should be removed from written and verbal agency
messaging that lead to mischaracterization of bears. Here we present ten terms and definitions
that will facilitate clear and consistent communications and allow jurisdictions to better
compare databases. We also identify five terms that should be removed from professional
wildlife management vernacular and publications on human-bear conflicts.